The present invention relates to methods of manufacture of segmented particles and assemblies of differentiable particles (which may or may not be segmented). Without a doubt, there has been a paradigm change in what is traditionally defined as bioanalytical chemistry. A major focus of these new technologies is to generate what could be called “increased per volume information content”. This term encompasses several approaches, from reduction in the volume of sample required to carry out an assay, to highly parallel measurements (“multiplexing”), such as those involving immobilized molecular arrays, to incorporation of second (or third) information channels, such as in 2-D gel electrophoresis or CE-electrospray MS/MS.
Unfortunately, many of these seemingly revolutionary technologies are limited by a reliance on relatively pedestrian materials, methods, and analyses. For example, development of DNA microarrays (“gene chips”) for analysis of gene expression and genotyping by Affymetrix, Incyte and similar companies has generated the wherewithal to immobilize up to 20,000 different fragments or full-length pieces of DNA in a spatially-defined 1-cm2 array. At the same time, however, the use of these chips in all cases requires hybridization of DNA in solution to DNA immobilized on a planar surface, which is marked both by a decrease in the efficiency of hybridization (especially for cDNA) and a far greater degree of non-specific binding. It is unclear whether these problems can be completely overcome. Moreover, there is a general sense of disillusionment both about the cost of acquiring external technology and the lead-time required to develop DNA arraying internally.
A second example of how groundbreaking can be slowed by inferior tools is in pharmaceutical discovery by combinatorial chemistry. At the moment, solution phase, 5-10 μm diameter latex beads are used extensively as sites for molecular immobilization. Exploiting the widely adopted “split and pool” strategy, libraries of upwards of 100,000 compounds can be simply and rapidly generated. As a result, the bottleneck in drug discovery has shifted from synthesis to screening, and equally importantly, to compound identification, (i.e., which compound is on which bead?). Current approaches to the latter comprise “bead encoding”, whereby each synthetic step applied to a bead is recorded by parallel addition of an organic “code” molecule; reading the code allows the identity of the drug lead on the bead to be identified. Unfortunately, the “code reading” protocols are far from optimal: in most every strategy, the code molecule must be cleaved from the bead and separately analyzed by HPLC, mass spectrometry or other methods. In other words, there is at present no way to identify potentially interesting drug candidates by direct, rapid interrogation of the beads on which they reside, even though there are numerous screening protocols in which such a capability would be desirable.
Two alternative technologies with potential relevance both to combinatorial chemistry and genetic analysis involve “self-encoded beads”, in which a spectrally identifiable bead substitutes for a spatially defined position. In the approach pioneered by walt and co-workers, beads are chemically modified with a ratio of fluorescent dyes intended to uniquely identify the beads, which are then further modified with a unique chemistry (e.g. a different antibody or enzyme). The beads are then randomly dispersed on an etched fiber array so that one bead associates with each fiber. The identity of the bead is ascertained by its fluorescence readout, and the analyte is detected by fluorescence readout at the same fiber in a different spectral region. The seminal paper (Michael et al., Anal. Chem. 70, 1242-1248 (1998)) on this topic points out that with 6 different dyes (15 combinations of pairs) and with 10 different ratios of dyes, 150 “unique optical signatures” could be generated, each representing a different bead “flavor”. A very similar strategy is described by workers at Luminex, who combine flavored beads ready for chemical modification (100 commercially available) with a flow cytometry-like analysis. (See, e.g., McDade et al., Med. Rev. Diag. Indust. 19, 75-82 (1997)). Once again, the particle flavor is determined by fluorescence, and once the biochemistry is put onto the bead, any spectrally distinct fluorescence generated due to the presence of analyte can be read out. Note that as currently configured, it is necessary to use one color of laser to interrogate the particle flavor, and another, separate laser to excite the bioassay fluorophores.
A more significant concern with self-encoded latex beads is the limitations imposed by the wide bandwidth associated with molecular fluorescence. If the frequency space of molecular fluorescence is used both for encoding and for bioassay analysis, it is hard to imagine how, for example, up to 20,000 different flavors could be generated. This problem might be alleviated somewhat by the use of combinations of glass-coated quantum dots, which exhibit narrower fluorescence bandwidths. (See, e.g. Bruchez et al., Science, 281, 2013-2016 (1998)). However, these “designer” nanoparticles arc quite difficult to prepare, and at the moment, there exist more types of fluorophores than (published) quantum dots. If, however, it were possible to generate very large numbers of intrinsically-differentiablc particles by some means, then particle-based bioanalysis would become exceptionally attractive, insofar as a single technology platform could then be considered for the multiple high-information content research areas; including combinatorial chemistry, genomics, and proteomics (via multiplexed immunoassays).
Previous work has originally taught how metal can be deposited into the pores of a metallized membrane to make an array of metal nanoparticles embedded in the host. Their focus was on the optical and/or electrochemical properties of these materials. A similar technique was used to make segmented cylindrical magnetic nanoparticles in a host membrane, where the composition of the particles was varied along the length. In no case, however, have freestanding, rod-shaped nanoparticles with variable compositions along their length been prepared. Indeed, “freestanding” rod-shaped metal nanoparticlcs of a single composition, in which the length is at least one micron, have never been reported. Likewise, freestanding rod-shaped metal nanoparticles not embedded or otherwise contained within such host materials have never been reported. See, Martin et a., Adv. Materials 11 1021-25 (1999).